Literature DB >> 17632707

Judging surface slant for placing objects: a role for motion parallax.

Stefan Louw1, Jeroen B J Smeets, Eli Brenner.   

Abstract

People have a variety of sources of information (cues) about surface slant at their disposal. We used a simple placing task to evaluate the relative importance of three such cues (motion parallax, binocular disparity and texture) within the space in which people normally manipulate objects. To do so, we projected a stimulus onto a rotatable screen. This allowed us to manipulate texture cues independently of binocular disparity and motion parallax. We asked people to stand in front of the screen and place a cylinder on the screen. We analysed the cylinder's orientation just before contact. Participants mainly relied on binocular cues (weight between 50 and 90%), in accordance with binocular cues being known to be reliable when the stimulus surface is nearby and almost frontal. Texture cues contributed between 2 and 18% to the estimated slant. Motion parallax was given a weight between 1 and 9%, despite the fact that it only provided information when the head began to move, which was just before the arm did. Thus motion parallax is used to judge surface slant, even when one is under the impression of standing still.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17632707      PMCID: PMC2039806          DOI: 10.1007/s00221-007-1043-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  31 in total

1.  Depth thresholds of motion parallax as a function of head movement velocity.

Authors:  H Ujike; H Ono
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Reaching for virtual objects: binocular disparity and the control of prehension.

Authors:  Paul B Hibbard; Mark F Bradshaw
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2002-11-19       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Surface orientation from texture: ideal observers, generic observers and the information content of texture cues.

Authors:  D C Knill
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Discrimination of planar surface slant from texture: human and ideal observers compared.

Authors:  D C Knill
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Surface orientation from texture: isotropy or homogeneity (or both)?

Authors:  R Rosenholtz; J Malik
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Cue conflict and stereoscopic surface slant about horizontal and vertical axes.

Authors:  C Ryan; B Gillam
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.490

Review 7.  Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion.

Authors:  M S Landy; L T Maloney; E B Johnston; M Young
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Binocular vision and the on-line control of human prehension.

Authors:  P Servos; M A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception.

Authors:  B Rogers; M Graham
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 1.886

10.  Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception.

Authors:  B Rogers; M Graham
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 1.490

View more
  7 in total

1.  The visual input to the retina during natural head-free fixation.

Authors:  Murat Aytekin; Jonathan D Victor; Michele Rucci
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-17       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 2.  Bayesian models: the structure of the world, uncertainty, behavior, and the brain.

Authors:  Iris Vilares; Konrad Kording
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 5.691

3.  Visual-haptic cue integration with spatial and temporal disparity during pointing movements.

Authors:  Sascha Serwe; Konrad P Körding; Julia Trommershäuser
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Motion parallax from microscopic head movements during visual fixation.

Authors:  Murat Aytekin; Michele Rucci
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Use of cues in virtual reality depends on visual feedback.

Authors:  Jacqueline M Fulvio; Bas Rokers
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Head jitter enhances three-dimensional motion perception.

Authors:  Jacqueline M Fulvio; Huiyuan Miao; Bas Rokers
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  The experience of stereoblindness does not improve use of texture for slant perception.

Authors:  Pin Yang; Jeffrey A Saunders; Zhongting Chen
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2022-04-06       Impact factor: 2.004

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.